Not Linked In, thankfully? |
Loading ...
This is odd, the Linked In VP actually thinks their service can do a better job than the Yellow Pages. Certain sections of the Yellow Pages, anyway. Funny thing is last time I checked the Yellow Pages I didn’t have to register for something first before searching through it.
Web-based social networking takes advantage of the power of relationships among friends, and friend of friends, in social settings. Similarly, LinkedIn relies on connections with business colleagues and, in turn, their colleagues.
The words “takes advantage” ring eerily in the text above. Yes, it’s the Reuters reporter’s words, but it’s the perspective I have with services like these that want to know all about our friends of friends of friends and try to draw some cosmic connection with the data.
I register for almost everything, but one missed to date has been Linked In. It appears from the comments by Coding Horror that I’m glad I haven’t yet:
I’ve been a member of Linked In for almost two years now. I dutifully entered my credentials and kept them up to date. The only other interaction I’ve had with the service since then has been a continual stream of link requests. I’m selective about who I approve, limiting it to people I’ve only met in real life. And the net benefit of this selectivity? As far as I can tell, zilch. Nada. Nothing. I did get a cold call from a headhunter once based on my Linked In profile, but I don’t consider that a benefit.
Coding Horror also indicates there is no automated way to cancel. Any service which doesn’t let me leave as easily as join is a non-starter. It’s doubful, although definitely ambitious, that they will ever become comprehensive enough to replace the Yellow Pages. If they ever should and they allow people to search for people they don’t know by service without registering, then I’ll get listed. In the meantime, I’m sticking with the reference from Coding Horror who actually has been using the Linked In service for two years.
Any readers have experience — pro, con or neutral — with Linked In?
Related Posts- Rave whoring
- Fortune cookie social networking message?
- McAfee SiteAdvisor gives PCmag.com yellow warning rating
- Feedback: The Register - Webloggers deal Harvard a black eye
- Friendster newsletter emails pictures of minors to adults, why?
- Bill Gates should stick to software, charities and skip predictions
Had a couple of cold headhunter shots which actually was to my benefit. It needs a lot of tweaking, but I also look at it as a way to keep my resume up-to-date instead of a Word doc. Otherwise, it’s pretty useless from the “9 degrees of Kevin Bacon” standpoint. I do like to see what people are doing from time to time, since you can’t keep on top of everyone of your buddies.
From the standpoint of CodingHorror, he’s right. From the other side though, since I don’t get the millions of requests, it actually doesn’t matter one way or another depending on what you use it for.
Comment by darkmoon — October 16, 2006 @ 9:43 am PST
Ahh, so if you are looking for work it might be useful then darkmoon?
Comment by TDavid — October 16, 2006 @ 9:49 am PST
Yeah. At least I would think so. I know that Calacanis and a few others have actually posted job postings via Linked-In. From my end, I’m not looking for another job but opportunity is always good to look out for. I think that a lot of people dislike it due to random hits. It’s no different from posting your resume online though or on Monster and just waiting.
Is the social network aspect worthwhile? I’d say no, it’s just a gimmick. But it’s more interesting as a professional to have this network than say MySpace/Facebook or Friendster.
Just my opinion.
Comment by darkmoon — October 16, 2006 @ 10:12 am PST
Yes, you have to log in to see the recommendations, but you don’t get recommendations with the yellow pages–and especially not from people you know. When I’m hiring an attorney, dentist, general contractor, etc., I definitely always rely on recommendations from people I know. Until now, I had to email all my friends to get recommendations, but that was highly inefficient for them and me.
I like the “check spelling” option!
Comment by Konstantin Guericke — October 16, 2006 @ 12:33 pm PST
I have to agree with Darkmoon on this; that it really is more about a formalised professional netwrok rather than a social network.
Certainly one aspect that I have found interesting is using it as a lever to check what the professional associations etc of similar people in roles that I would like are.
I also have found it quite a good way to keep in touch with all those business acquantancies from time past, which more social oriented sites actually are not that appropriate for.
Comment by iiq374 — October 16, 2006 @ 2:10 pm PST
Mostly neutral. I have reestablished contact with a couple of people I hadn’t talked to in years through it, but otherwise no benefit or harm.
Comment by Sterling Camden — October 16, 2006 @ 2:35 pm PST
[…] - The iPod exercise purchase (1) [oct 15] - Not Linked In, thankfully? (6) [oct 16] - Plasma to be replaced by laser TV? (5) [oct 18] - Here we blow again: the embarassing IE7 launch (2) [oct 19] “IE7’s crashed once on me since RC1, with Firefox 1.5 and beyond, it’s pretty much something that happens weekly. With the way I browse, it’s a huge annoyance to lose dozens of tabs that I had open and try to remember what I had and hadn’t seen. It’s good that there’s an extension for 1.5.x to save tabs, and that 2.0 will have it built in, but I much prefered the 1.0.x days when I could just open and open and open them, leave them open for days on end before getting through them, and not have to wonder with each new tab, “Is this going to be the one that crashes them all?”” – Comment by n00b — October 19, 2006 @ 10:52 pm […]
Pingback by Hmmcast #26: getting in shape » Make You Go Hmm — October 20, 2006 @ 12:59 pm PST
Linked-In is quite useful to me, and I enjoy playing with it.
I consider it as a funny online RPG. See http://my.opera.com/jcayzac/blog/is-linked-in-a-mmorpg to better understand my point.
Comment by Julien — November 3, 2006 @ 9:13 am PST